• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

China Expanded Air Defense Zone

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,723
Reaction score
169
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
"US Tests New China Air Defense Zone With B-52s; PRC Move Drives Korea, Japan Together"
By Sydney J. Freedberg Jr. on November 26, 2013 at 9:41 AM

URL:
http://breakingdefense.com/2013/11/chinas-new-defense-zone-drives-korea-japan-together/

How far are the parties in the Senkaku Islands (Diaoyu Islands) dispute willing to take things?
 

F-14D

I really did change my personal text
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
1,731
Reaction score
7
Triton said:
"US Tests New China Air Defense Zone With B-52s; PRC Move Drives Korea, Japan Together"
By Sydney J. Freedberg Jr. on November 26, 2013 at 9:41 AM

URL:
http://breakingdefense.com/2013/11/chinas-new-defense-zone-drives-korea-japan-together/

How far are the parties in the Senkaku Islands (Diaoyu Islands) dispute willing to take things?
Well, China in the past has shown a willingness to be aggressive and is quite blunt about how it feels regarding nations that get in its way. In 2010 there was a meeting of Southeast Asian nations. At it, a number of countries raised complaints about China's actions in the area, including seizing or blocking access to disputed territories or resources China wants to have under their control. Here is a direct quote from China's foreign minister Yang Jiechi at the conference addressing those concerns:

“China is a big country,” he said, “and other countries are small countries and that is just a fact.”
 

Orionblamblam

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
7,322
Reaction score
185
Website
www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com
Triton said:
How far are the parties in the Senkaku Islands (Diaoyu Islands) dispute willing to take things?
Well, China *does* have a surplus of about 40 million males. As the US is finding, excess young males either get a job or start playing the "knockout game." So China might do the math and realize that throwing away a few million lives in an attempt to grab a little bit of extra turf is a safe exchange.
 

F-14D

I really did change my personal text
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
1,731
Reaction score
7
Orionblamblam said:
Triton said:
How far are the parties in the Senkaku Islands (Diaoyu Islands) dispute willing to take things?
Well, China *does* have a surplus of about 40 million males. As the US is finding, excess young males either get a job or start playing the "knockout game." So China might do the math and realize that throwing away a few million lives in an attempt to grab a little bit of extra turf is a safe exchange.
As an aside regarding a dangerous situation, the video that many stations are showing to illustrate what's happening, the 16 year old girl getting knocked out from behind and falling face first on the sidewalk actually took place in London. The attacker blamed her because she, "...didn't have a friendly face".

Not really on-topic overall, I realize- I'm OK if it gets pulled, but since knockout came up I thought it was revealing how the media sometimes works.
 

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,723
Reaction score
169
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
Take with a grain of salt:

"China's six wars in the next 50 years"
http://www.aspistrategist.org.au/chinas-six-wars-in-the-next-50-years/
 

VH

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Feb 24, 2008
Messages
205
Reaction score
0
Explain why this timetable should be taken with a 'grain of salt'? Don't you believe what is being laid out before you?
 

Avimimus

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Dec 16, 2007
Messages
1,909
Reaction score
13
Warhawks, brinksmanship, hunts for fifth columnists and fellow travellers... Don't you wish that people would just grow up a little bit?

Would either side conduct a first strike on a nuclear armed state? No. Will the U.S. subvert all elements of Chinese culture? No. Will any Chinese effort to change to the U.S. sphere of influence cause a greater collapse in U.S. influence than was going to happen anyway? Not likely.
 

Jemiba

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
7,993
Reaction score
149
"Who's afraid of Jimmy Kimmel ?" ;)

Didn't hear about diplomatic commotions because of that film at all ...
 

antigravite

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Apr 25, 2008
Messages
673
Reaction score
11
Jemiba said:
"Who's afraid of Jimmy Kimmel ?" ;)

Didn't hear about diplomatic commotions because of that film at all ...
Roger. I copy you down. Relax n Tranquility base here. The Kimmel has landed. ::)

A.
 

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,723
Reaction score
169
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
"Chinese jets shadowed US and Japanese planes in new air defense zone"
Published time: November 29, 2013 13:42
Edited time: November 29, 2013 15:03

Source:
http://rt.com/news/china-follow-japan-jets-488/

Chinese fighter jets were scrambled and followed US and Japanese planes that had entered the newly-proclaimed Chinese air defense zone in the disputed area of the East China Sea, Xinhua reports.

Two US surveillance aircraft and 10 Japanese F-15 jets were ‘tailed’ by Chinese pilots on Friday.

China ordered an urgent dispatch of its Su-30 and J-10 fighter jets to an area in the East China Sea after the foreign aircraft “invaded” the air defense zone, they said.

The reported intrusions came in defiance of the East China Sea Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ), established by Beijing last week.

China’s move has triggered outrage from several states in the region and critical rhetoric from the US, as the vast zone covers disputed areas, including the islets claimed by both China and Japan.

Earlier on Thursday, the Chinese Air Force conducted its first air patrol flights over the zone, as Japan and South Korea sent their own military aircraft into the zone's airspace in an act of defiance.

China has stressed its decision to enforce the airspace identification zone - which requires all aircraft flying over or near it to identify themselves - follows common international practices and “is a necessary measure in China’s exercise of self-defense rights.”

No international flights will be affected by the setup of the zone, Chinese Air Force spokesman, Shen Jinke, told Xinhua.

Japan and its US ally blasted the decision as “unacceptable” and rejected the “unilateral” declaration, saying it would create dangerous tension. However, Chinese officials gave a reminder that both countries have long had their own ADIZ, and that the Japanese never discussed theirs with their neighbor.

“If they want it revoked, then we would ask that Japan first revoke its own air defense identification zone and China will reconsider it after 44 years,” China’s Defense Ministry spokesman, Yang Yujun, said in a statement posted on the ministry’s website on Thursday.

While possible action against the zone’s infiltrators has been vaguely defined as “defensive emergency measures,” The Global Times, a Chinese state media newspaper, on Friday called for “timely countermeasures without hesitation,” should Tokyo violate the new ADIZ.

At the same time, the paper suggested China could ignore violations by some other states, including the US. Two US military B-52 bombers flew over the area on Monday without prior notice, with a Pentagon spokesman telling Reuters we “have continued to follow our normal procedures.”
 

Abraham Gubler

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
3,559
Reaction score
13
Triton said:
"Chinese jets shadowed US and Japanese planes in new air defense zone"
Published time: November 29, 2013 13:42
Edited time: November 29, 2013 15:03

Source:
http://rt.com/news/china-follow-japan-jets-488/
You're posting 'news' from RussiaToday. All it needs is a couple of inserts of "running dog" here and there and it would be word perfect for AgitProp from the 1970s.
 

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,723
Reaction score
169
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
Abraham Gubler said:
You're posting 'news' from RussiaToday. All it needs is a couple of inserts of "running dog" here and there and it would be word perfect for AgitProp from the 1970s.
You doubt the veracity of Russia Today as AgitProp?

CNN:
http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/29/world/asia/china-japan-us-tensions/

Christian Science Monitor:
http://www.csmonitor.com/layout/set/r14/World/Latest-News-Wires/2013/1129/China-says-it-scrambled-fighters-to-eye-US-Japanese-flights-in-its-new-defense-zone

BBC:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-25155605

Reuters:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/11/29/us-japan-china-patrol-idUSBRE9AR0OM20131129

What if Argentina established an Air Defense Identification Zone in the South Atlantic that included the Falkland Islands?
 

Kadija_Man

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2011
Messages
1,899
Reaction score
14
I wonder why no one got their knickers in a twist when the US unilaterally declared one along the East and West coasts in 2001?

The thing is, unless enforced, such declarations are pretty pointless. All they are, afterall is a declaration of intent that the declaring country wants to know what is happening in the zone as far as air transit is concerned. China will not be able to enforce this zone without going to the point of war and I don't think they're that attached to the idea, despite what the usual right-wing rhetoric claims about their intentions.
 

TomS

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
3,178
Reaction score
102
Kadija_Man said:
I wonder why no one got their knickers in a twist when the US unilaterally declared one along the East and West coasts in 2001?
Because the US ADIZ didn't overlap areas of disputed sovereignty.
 

starviking

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2006
Messages
946
Reaction score
14
Triton said:
Abraham Gubler said:
You're posting 'news' from RussiaToday. All it needs is a couple of inserts of "running dog" here and there and it would be word perfect for AgitProp from the 1970s.
You doubt the veracity of Russia Today as AgitProp?
Well, it's certainly full of rubbish on Fukushima.

On the subject of plane intercepts, the JGov is saying none happened:

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2013/11/30/national/no-chinese-jets-scrambled-japan/
 

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,723
Reaction score
169
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
"More Chinese Air ID Zones Predicted"
Dec. 1, 2013 - 03:45AM |
By WENDELL MINNICK, JUNG SUNG-KI and PAUL KALLENDER-UMEZU

Source:
http://www.defensenews.com/article/20131201/DEFREG03/312010004
 

Deino

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
2,488
Reaction score
54
TomS said:
Kadija_Man said:
I wonder why no one got their knickers in a twist when the US unilaterally declared one along the East and West coasts in 2001?
Because the US ADIZ didn't overlap areas of disputed sovereignty.
Yes, but the word "disputed" is IMO exactly the point ! As long as Japan not even recognised these Island as "disputed" and agrees to negotiate.
 

Abraham Gubler

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
3,559
Reaction score
13
Deino said:
Yes, but the word "disputed" is IMO exactly the point ! As long as Japan not even recognised these Island as "disputed" and agrees to negotiate.
I’m pretty sure Japan recognises that China disputes the sovereignty of these islands. The ADIZ is clearly an indication of that regardless of all the back and forth since the 1970s. But Japan has an unassailable legal position of sovereignty over the islands. The Chinese claim is extremely weak which is why China has made no effort to resolve the dispute through the ICJ. China is trying to pressure Japan into negotiating and giving away things it doesn’t have to under the law of the world. The ADIZ and other Chinese brinkmanship is a classic case of bullying activity to pressure Japan into caving in. Clearly in this case the ADIZ has backfired as the response around the world has been to condemn China and Japan has stood up the challenge and not chickened out from it.
 

F-14D

I really did change my personal text
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
1,731
Reaction score
7
Abraham Gubler said:
Deino said:
Yes, but the word "disputed" is IMO exactly the point ! As long as Japan not even recognised these Island as "disputed" and agrees to negotiate.
I’m pretty sure Japan recognises that China disputes the sovereignty of these islands. The ADIZ is clearly an indication of that regardless of all the back and forth since the 1970s. But Japan has an unassailable legal position of sovereignty over the islands. The Chinese claim is extremely weak which is why China has made no effort to resolve the dispute through the ICJ. China is trying to pressure Japan into negotiating and giving away things it doesn’t have to under the law of the world. The ADIZ and other Chinese brinkmanship is a classic case of bullying activity to pressure Japan into caving in. Clearly in this case the ADIZ has backfired as the response around the world has been to condemn China and Japan has stood up the challenge and not chickened out from it.
While we, OTOH, have told our airlines to cooperate.
 

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,723
Reaction score
169
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
South Korea to Expand Its Air Defense Identification Zone

Following the creation of the East China Sea ADIZ, Seoul is planning on expanding the territory its own ADIZ covers.

by Zachary Keck
December 02, 2013

Source:
http://thediplomat.com/2013/12/south-korea-to-expand-its-air-defense-identification-zone/

South Korea is finalizing plans to expand its Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) in response to China establishing the East China Sea ADIZ, local newspapers are reporting.

According to a number of local reports, ROK National Security Office chief Kim Jang-soo convened a meeting of top South Korean security officials on Sunday to discuss the new ADIZ.

The Korean Herald reported that the ADIZ is rumored to include the “country’s southernmost island of Marado; Hongdo Island, an uninhabited island south of Geojedo Island; and Ieodo, a submerged rock within the overlapping exclusive economic zones of South Korea and China.”

Yonhap News Agency quoted an unnamed local official as saying “(The new KADIZ) has been conceptually finalized. The government will announce the plan after carefully reviewing the military operation and aviation safety as well as the international regulations.”

Those consultations were initially scheduled to wrap up as early as Tuesday, however, Seoul has reportedly decided to delay the meetings in light of U.S. Vice President Joe Biden’s trip to the region this week. The meetings now may not take place until next week.

South Korea’s current ADIZ was established by the U.S. Air Force in 1951. Following China’s announcement that it is creating an East China Sea ADIZ, which overlapped with the KADIZ, many in South Korea were surprised to learn that the KADIZ didn’t cover some of Seoul’s more remotely claimed islands and submerged reefs.

Expanding the ADIZ is likely to increase tensions with China. Although the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) prohibits countries from claiming submerged reefs like Ieodo (China calls it Suyan Rock), both China and South Korea claim the rock, which falls within both of their respective Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs).

In a Global Times article last month, Zhao Jianming, a professor at the Institute of International Relations at Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences said that compared with other territorial disputes in the East China Sea, “the issue of Suyan Rock, disputed between China and South Korea, is relatively uncovered, but still not unimportant.”

However, the two countries have often been at odds over the submerged rock, particularly when South Korea built the Ieodo Ocean Research Station and a helicopter pad on Ieodo. Zhao said in this article that China’s maritime agencies regularly patrol the waters around the rock. The East China Sea ADIZ also included Ieodo.

At bilateral defense talks last week, China assured South Korea that the new ADIZ was aimed at Tokyo not Seoul. Still, Beijing rejected Seoul’s demand that it redraw the new ADIZ to ensure that it does not encroach on any territory claimed by South Korea. In response, South Korea first suggested that it might expand its own ADIZ to cover its southernmost possessions.

Like Japan and the United States, South Korea has refused to recognize China’s ADIZ and continues to patrol the waters and skies above Ieodo as usual. The Seoul government has also told its national airlines not to identify their planes to China as Beijing demanded all airplanes do when flying in the ADIZ.

South Korea has also been in close consultation with the United States since China first announced the ADIZ. Evan Medeiros, the senior director of Asian affairs at the U.S. National Security Council (NSC) met with security officials in Seoul last Wednesday to discuss the ADIZ. As noted above, Vice President Joe Biden will also be in South Korea this week, where conversations are likely to center on China’s new ADIZ. Meanwhile, Kang Chang-hee, speaker of the National Assembly of the Republic of Korea (ROK), is expected to visit China later this week.

Medeiros and Biden are also visiting Japan during their trips.
 

Orionblamblam

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
7,322
Reaction score
185
Website
www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com
Why can't we (as in "the world") simply declare that the islands belong to no state? Then, when it comes time to deport criminals and illegal aliens and the like, there's someplace new to put them. At seven square kilometers, if they were populated as densely as Manila, you could put 300,000 people on 'em.
 

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,723
Reaction score
169
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
F-14D said:
While we, OTOH, have told our airlines to cooperate.
"Note To US State Department: FAA's Notice To US Airlines Operating in Chinese ADIZ Is Mandatory"
by John Goglia, Contributor
December 3, 2013

Source:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/johngoglia/2013/12/03/note-to-us-state-department-faas-notice-to-airlines-operating-in-chinese-adiz-is-mandatory/

The New York Times is reporting this morning that there is some confusion in Japan over the US’s response to China’s new Air Defense Identification Zone in the East China Sea. In particular, the Japanese and the US have taken differing approaches to whether its commercial airliners are to comply with the Chinese requirement to file flight plans and remain in two-way communication when entering and transiting the ADIZ. According to this morning’s New York Times, the State Department has told the Japanese that the “Federal Aviation Administration’s decision was a safety recommendation – far short of an order, though major American airlines said they were heeding it.” http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/04/world/asia/biden-in-japan-calibrates-message-over-tensions-with-china.html?pagewanted=2&_r=0&hp That is an incorrect statement.

In fact China issued a Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) which is regulatory and thus mandatory on all US operators in the East China Sea: The NOTAM clearly states:

REGULATIONS REGARDING FLIGHT PLAN SUBMISSION IN THE EAST CHINA SEA AIR DEFENSE IDENTIFICATION ZONE (ADIZ) OF PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA:

1.CIVIL AVIATION SCHEDULED FLIGHTS, AND ANY NON-SCHEDULED FLIGHTS INCLUDING EXTRA SCHEDULED FLIGHTS, CHARTERED FLIGHTS, FERRY FLIGHTS AND BUSINESS FLIGHTS SHALL SUBMIT FLIGHT PLAN TO AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL DEPARTMENT OF CAAC.

STATE FLIGHTS, VIP CHARTERED FLIGHTS, AND THE TRANSPORT FLIGHTS OF WEAPONS AND AMMUNITIONOPERATED BY CIVIL AIRCRAFT SHALL SUBMIT FLIGHT PLAN TO THE MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS OF THE PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA. https://pilotweb.nas.faa.gov/PilotWeb/notamRetrievalByICAOAction.do?method=displayByICAOs&reportType=RAW&formatType=DOMESTIC&retrieveLocId=ZBBB&actionType=notamRetrievalByICAOs

Pilots of US aircraft are required by federal aviation regulation to comply with all NOTAMs. Specifically, FAA regulation 91.139(c) states: When a NOTAM has been issued under this section, no person may operate an aircraft, or other device governed by the regulation concerned, within the designated airspace except in accordance with the authorizations, terms, and conditions prescribed in the regulation covered by the NOTAM.

The FAA has properly mandated that US aircraft operators avoid a potentially disastrous confrontation in the East China Sea by mandating that US airlines and other US aircraft operators comply with the Chinese ADIZ requirements. In my opinion, civil aircraft are not pawns to be used in a high-stakes game of chicken.

Correction: This post was corrected to reflect that China promulgated the NOTAM which the FAA included in its list of NOTAMs.
 

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,723
Reaction score
169
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
Orionblamblam said:
Why can't we (as in "the world") simply declare that the islands belong to no state? Then, when it comes time to deport criminals and illegal aliens and the like, there's someplace new to put them. At seven square kilometers, if they were populated as densely as Manila, you could put 300,000 people on 'em.
It's not a dispute over the seven square kilometers of land.

[The Senkaku Islands] matter because they are close to important shipping lanes, offer rich fishing grounds and lie near potential oil and gas reserves. They are also in a strategically significant position, amid rising competition between the US and China for military primacy in the Asia-Pacific region.
Source:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-11341139
 

Abraham Gubler

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
3,559
Reaction score
13
Orionblamblam said:
Why can't we (as in "the world") simply declare that the islands belong to no state?
Because the Senakus belong to Japan. If the ‘world’ can just but in and take land away from a state on a whim then where does it stop? The process for international intervention in sovereignty requires an awful lot more than anything associated with China’s claim to these islands. Like a local population desiring change in sovereignty. Which is not the case here.

There is no dispute over the islands under law. Japan has an unassailable sovereignty to them. China is using brinkmanship as a means to subvert this sovereignty. This case is not much different to the Falkland Islands except China has an even worse case than Argentina.
 

Orionblamblam

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
7,322
Reaction score
185
Website
www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com
Abraham Gubler said:
Because the Senakus belong to Japan.
And Dantzig belonged to Germany. Now it's called Gdansk.

If the ‘world’ can just but in and take land away from a state on a whim then where does it stop?
I dunno... Tokyo Bay?

The islands don't seem to have had much in the way of *anything* going on since 1972... when the US more or less abandoned them. Perhaps the US should go in and claim them?

There is no dispute over the islands under law.
Agreed! They are clearly American property. Japan lost 'em to us fair and square.

How about this for a compromise: the US returns to administer them, and then we use them as testing grounds for new generations of multi-megaton-class hydrogen bombs. We have fallen far behind in the development of such. Once the US has developed and demonstrated these new weapons, and reduced the islands to not just craters but *deep* craters, blowing out the gas reserves, then they're be of no more interest to the fightin' politicians than any other scrap of water in the ocean.

Don't deny it: you recognize my idea as Solomonesque in its unassailable wisdom. The Chinese and Japanese wouldn't have this as an issue to fight over, the US would have some shiny new reliable nukes for our arsenal, and the Chinese military and leadership would have a real close view of just what they'd be looking at if they tried to start a ruckus. What's not to like?
 

Abraham Gubler

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
3,559
Reaction score
13
Orionblamblam said:
And Dantzig belonged to Germany. Now it's called Gdansk.
Danzig wasn’t handed over to Poland by the world in 1913 on a whim. It took two world wars, the death of 25 million people, and the forced relocation of another 25 million before the name was changed.
 

Deino

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
2,488
Reaction score
54
Abraham Gubler said:
Deino said:
Yes, but the word "disputed" is IMO exactly the point ! As long as Japan not even recognised these Island as "disputed" and agrees to negotiate.
I’m pretty sure Japan recognises that China disputes the sovereignty of these islands. The ADIZ is clearly an indication of that regardless of all the back and forth since the 1970s. But Japan has an unassailable legal position of sovereignty over the islands. The Chinese claim is extremely weak which is why China has made no effort to resolve the dispute through the ICJ. China is trying to pressure Japan into negotiating and giving away things it doesn’t have to under the law of the world. The ADIZ and other Chinese brinkmanship is a classic case of bullying activity to pressure Japan into caving in. Clearly in this case the ADIZ has backfired as the response around the world has been to condemn China and Japan has stood up the challenge and not chickened out from it.
No, that's the point ! For Japan there is no reason to discuss anything and that's IMO exactly the point. These "rocks" in the ECS
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/9583883/Diaoyu-Dao-history-shall-not-be-reversed.html

http://www.scmp.com/news/china/artic...e-analysts-say

In the opinion on China Japan illegally seized Diaoyu Dao and its affiliated islands through the first Sino-Japanese war in 1895. Based on the “Cairo Declaration” after WW II it was stated in explicit terms that: “all the territories Japan has stolen from the Chinese, such as Manchuria, Formosa (Taiwan) and the Pescadores, shall be restored to the Republic of China. Japan will also be expelled from all other territories she has taken by violence and greed.” Nearly two years later in the “Potsdam Proclamation” these points were reaffirmed and the Japanese government accepted both these “contracts”. As such in accordance to the Cairo Declaration, the Potsdam Proclamation and the Japanese Instrument of Surrender, Diaoyu Dao, as affiliated islands of Taiwan, should be returned, together with Taiwan, to China.

Now it becomes problematic ! Taiwan became in the meantime an independent state (even not accepted by mainland China) and in 1951 Japan signed the “Treaty of San Francisco” with the US and a number of other countries, which in effect put these Islands under US administration. It must be stressed that China was excluded from this treaty and islands handed over to the American administration in this treaty did not include Diaoyu Dao.

I know that often quoted historical records, which show them as Chinese Islands back in the Ming and Qing dynasties are not helpful – similar to the example of Danzig – in 1971 Japan and the US signed the agreement concerning the Ryukyu Islands and the Daito Islands, known as Okinawa Reversion Agreement. This treaty provided that powers of administration over the Ryukyu Islands and Diaoyu Dao would be “returned” to Japan. The Chinese government has consistently opposed these agreements between Japan and the US that excluded China. So, it should be no surprise that China never recognised them … and for Japan it became a fact !

In 1972 China-Japan relations normalized and six years later the treaty of peace and friendship was signed. Chinese and Japanese leaders agreed on shelving the Diaoyu Dao issue and waiting for a future settlement. And in the meantime no-one would have expected that these rocks in the sea will be reminded especially since China had other more pressing needs to solve. Now with China’s political and also military wake-up these things were remembered however Japan does not even admit the existence of a dispute over Dioayu Dao!

As such IMO the whole mess about the ADIZ, the coverage over this disputed Islands, the timing as well as these too harsh identification rules are simply a method to bring this topic back on the agenda and to force Japan at least to accept that these Islands are disputed.
 

Orionblamblam

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
7,322
Reaction score
185
Website
www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com
Abraham Gubler said:
Danzig wasn’t handed over to Poland by the world in 1913 on a whim. It took two world wars, the death of 25 million people, and the forced relocation of another 25 million before the name was changed.
Yes, indeed, the forced transfer of Danzig to Poland in 1945 was a crime against humanity by any measure. I'll get right on to worrying about a few islands that, really, nobody gives a damn about when Danzig is returned to Germany. Is that going to happen? Nope. So, I don't see me giving a damn about those little islands.

PS: Danzig wasn't handed over to Poland by the world. It was handed over to Stalin by FDR.
 

Abraham Gubler

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
3,559
Reaction score
13
Deino said:
In the opinion on China Japan illegally seized Diaoyu Dao and its affiliated islands through the first Sino-Japanese war in 1895. Based on the “Cairo Declaration” after WW II it was stated in explicit terms that: “all the territories Japan has stolen from the Chinese, such as Manchuria, Formosa (Taiwan) and the Pescadores, shall be restored to the Republic of China. Japan will also be expelled from all other territories she has taken by violence and greed.” Nearly two years later in the “Potsdam Proclamation” these points were reaffirmed and the Japanese government accepted both these “contracts”. As such in accordance to the Cairo Declaration, the Potsdam Proclamation and the Japanese Instrument of Surrender, Diaoyu Dao, as affiliated islands of Taiwan, should be returned, together with Taiwan, to China.

Now it becomes problematic !
No it became problematical in your first and second sentences. The above may be what the Chinese government puts about as their claim to the sovereignty of the Senkaku islands but its total fiction.

Japan’s claim to the Senkakus is independent of the Sino-China War and is based on Terra Nullis. The islands were incorporated into Japan before the Treaty of Shimonoseki and the transfer of Formosa (Taiwan) and associated islands. Further the Senkakus are not considered geographically part of Formosa so not associated islands. This was never disputed by China, either PRC or RoC, until the 1970s, including the geographic nature of the Senkakus as part of the Ryuku Islands.

These islands may have been on Chinese maps and the like going back to whenever but first discovery is not grounds for a claim to sovereignty under international law. One needs to be in active possession of the islands via occupation or practical control. Which is why Danzig was German. Because tens of thousands of Germans lived there.
 

Abraham Gubler

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
3,559
Reaction score
13
Orionblamblam said:
Yes, indeed, the forced transfer of Danzig to Poland in 1945 was a crime against humanity by any measure. I'll get right on to worrying about a few islands that, really, nobody gives a damn about when Danzig is returned to Germany. Is that going to happen? Nope. So, I don't see me giving a damn about those little islands.
WWI and WWII were not fought over the issue of making Danzig Polish. There were kind of other things involved in case you didn’t notice. The transfer of Poland’s border a few hundred kilometres to the left was a by-product of the war.

Orionblamblam said:
PS: Danzig wasn't handed over to Poland by the world. It was handed over to Stalin by FDR.
And they didn’t do it in 1913. Which was what I wrote making the point that it has nothing to do with your plan for the Senkakus. Danzig’s status as a result of WWI and WWII was entirely because of these wars not because before the war Poland really wanted it.
 

Orionblamblam

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
7,322
Reaction score
185
Website
www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com
Abraham Gubler said:
And they didn’t do it in 1913. Which was what I wrote making the point that it has nothing to do with your plan for the Senkakus. Danzig’s status as a result of WWI and WWII was entirely because of these wars not because before the war Poland really wanted it.
Yes, and if we bomb these islands off the map, it won't be because Poland wanted that, either. The US didn't go to war in order to score these islands, but we got 'em. If China and Japan can't play nice like good children, the US needs to step up to the role of Terrifying Psychotic Adult and vaporize the islands.

If there's a way to call it a "drone strike," I'm sure we can get the current administration behind it.
 

Abraham Gubler

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
3,559
Reaction score
13
Orionblamblam said:
Yes, and if we bomb these islands off the map, it won't be because Poland wanted that, either. The US didn't go to war in order to score these islands, but we got 'em. If China and Japan can't play nice like good children, the US needs to step up to the role of Terrifying Psychotic Adult and vaporize the islands.
That does not bear any resemblance to the history of WWII and the post war occupation of Japan nor current USG policy. The US has never claimed sovereignty to the Ryuku Island chain. But they did administer them for 25 odd years. But this was under the aegis of military occupation. Like Israel and the West Bank just without the terrorists and the European protest nihilism tourists. But in 1972 the US returned administrative control over the islands to Japan who still had retained undisputed sovereignty.
 

Orionblamblam

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
7,322
Reaction score
185
Website
www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com
Abraham Gubler said:
The US has never claimed sovereignty to the Ryuku Island chain.
And now... It Is Time.

Imagine how conflicts over territory around the world would be resolved virtually overnight if the US decided that it really was Team America World Police, and simply eliminated conflict zones. "You have 24 hours. If y'all can't figure it out, we will simply take it from you."

Followed, of course, by "MUAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!!!!!!!!!"



(Don't tell me that you don't think the current Administration wouldn't go all giggitty at the thought of finally getting to truly throw its weight around)
 

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,723
Reaction score
169
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
The real question is what is "the world" prepared to do to halt this aggression by the People's Republic of China? The People's Liberation Army Navy now has a refurbished Kuznetsov-class aircraft carrier to challenge the United States Pacific Fleet and the Pax Americana in the region. Are there any real teeth to the condemnations expressed by the United States, Japan, and neighboring governments over the new East China Sea Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ)? How far is "the world" willing to go to protect Japanese interests? If the People's Republic of China were to seize the islands by military force what would "the world" actually do to protect the sovereignty of Japan? Is "the world" willing to jeopardize the flow of cheap goods manufactured in the People's Republic of China and the investments made by western companies in the country? Or will "the world" back down?
 

Jemiba

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
7,993
Reaction score
149
Triton said:
Is "the world" willing to jeopardize the flow of cheap goods manufactured in the People's Republic of China and
the investments made by western companies in the country? Or will "the world" back down?
It probably would be on the positive side then, that "the world" has to pay money even for those "cheap goods" and
that China needs this money, too. The economies of China and "the world" are very much interconnected, I think,
losing exports would not only hurt us, by increasing prices for toys, mobiles or computers, but it would hurt China, too.
And chinese funds are probably part of more companies in "the world", than is obvious to the public. Those funds would
be endangered in the event of a real conflict, too. What China is doing still is saber-rattling to me. And listening, if "the world"
panics.
 

F-14D

I really did change my personal text
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
1,731
Reaction score
7
Paying the Danegeld just kicks the can down the road.
 

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,723
Reaction score
169
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
F-14D said:
Paying the Danegeld just kicks the can down the road.
Will we see the equivalent of the Munich Agreement as a resolution to this territorial dispute in the East China Sea? Or will the situation escalate into a Third Sino-Japanese War?
 
Top